Re: [swinog] Re: Case ID 1070964 - Notice of Claimed Infringement

2003-09-26 Thread Viktor Steinmann
Fredy et all

I get about 10 such complaints per week:

My statement:

As long as *nobody* pays me the time I need to find out, which customer 
belongs to which IP, I will not do that work.

Any legal issue has to be communicated by signed letter - or else it will land 
in the trashcan anyway...  I'm thinking about blocking those addresses for a 
long time - nobody can urge me to accept email from anybody ;-)

Cheers,
Viktor

On Thursday 25 September 2003 22:31, Fredy Kuenzler wrote:
 Mark,

 MediaSentry Copyright Infringement wrote:
  RE:  Unauthorized Distribution of the Copyrighted Motion Picture
  Entitled Matrix: Reloaded, The
 
  Dear Fredy Kuenzler:
 

---snip-snap---
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/


Re: [swinog] Re: Case ID 1070964 - Notice of Claimed Infringement

2003-09-26 Thread Fredy Kuenzler
Alexander Koch wrote:
[snip]

If I am not utterly mistaken whether a personal copy is
allowed or not is not taken into account when this personal
copy is actively offered through a p2p network. At the point
any copy is offered it's automatically not a personal copy
any longer...
Good point, but I expect that the user downloaded and stored the file 
for personal use on his computer, which is not a law violation in 
Switzerland, because he did only *one* copy. It's also not illegal to 
run a P2P program. If a downloaded file is stored in a folder, which is 
made public of the P2P program, you might possibly blame the programmer 
of the P2P program, but not the user, which does not know much about 
computers - all he want's to do is watching a movie.

See the anaolgy to worm viruses? Programmers of virues should be sued, 
but not naive users, which don't know anything about security patches. 
They are of course annoying but not illegal.

my CHF 0.05
F.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/


RE: [swinog] Re: Case ID 1070964 - Notice of Claimed Infringement

2003-09-26 Thread Neil J. McRae
I think you'll find that there are always questions
over who is to blame and who has commited a crime. In
the end the courts [atleast in the UK and US] tend to go
after the easiest targets, thus the ISPs. You'll also find
that the media industries are working incredibly hard to
kill off the idea that one copy for personal use is ok.

But from a personaly perspective they are all wasting their
time, the media companies need to address the problems that
cause this issue in the first place - too long release times,
people annoyed going to the cinema and hearing popcorn
being chewed or SMS bleeps, too high prices, poor over hyped
films. The music industry is starting to show signs that it
understands and appears to be making changes [atleast in the
price respect] lets hope that this continues. When you see
pop stars getting paid 83M GBP in one single deal then in my
view its clear that something isn't right.

Regards,
Neil.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fredy Kuenzler
 Sent: 26 September 2003 08:06
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [swinog] Re: Case ID 1070964 - Notice of Claimed 
 Infringement
 
 
 Alexander Koch wrote:
  [snip]
  
  If I am not utterly mistaken whether a personal copy is 
 allowed or not 
  is not taken into account when this personal copy is 
 actively offered 
  through a p2p network. At the point any copy is offered it's 
  automatically not a personal copy any longer...
 
 Good point, but I expect that the user downloaded and stored the file 
 for personal use on his computer, which is not a law violation in 
 Switzerland, because he did only *one* copy. It's also not illegal to 
 run a P2P program. If a downloaded file is stored in a 
 folder, which is 
 made public of the P2P program, you might possibly blame the 
 programmer 
 of the P2P program, but not the user, which does not know much about 
 computers - all he want's to do is watching a movie.
 
 See the anaolgy to worm viruses? Programmers of virues should 
 be sued, 
 but not naive users, which don't know anything about security 
 patches. 
 They are of course annoying but not illegal.
 
 my CHF 0.05
 F.
 
 --
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive: 
 http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog% 40swinog.ch/
 

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/


Re: [swinog] Re: Case ID 1070964 - Notice of Claimed Infringement

2003-09-26 Thread Peter Keel
* on the Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 07:28:54AM +0200, Alexander Koch wrote:
 If I am not utterly mistaken whether a personal copy is
 allowed or not is not taken into account when this personal
 copy is actively offered through a p2p network. At the point
 any copy is offered it's automatically not a personal copy
 any longer...

Actually, the use of P2P-tools or whatsoever for downloading music
and movies is perfectly legal; this was recently affirmed by a swiss 
court. Even if this content is offered illegally. However, offering
said content yourself _is_ illegal, even if you own the original. 
You may, though, give copies of it to friends or relatives of yours
(fair use directive), as long as this remains withing reasonable 
borders (giving it to 3 or 4 friends is ok, giving it to 20 is not).
But sharing content to which you're not entitled to through P2P to
possibly thousands of others is _not_ fair use.

Note that this has nothing to do with the personal copy. That
personal copy is only for software, and only for software 
you're entitled to (e.g. have a license). 

But speaking of that claim the movie-industry makes here: It may
well be that this user is sharing content illegally. However, this
is not of interest to the ISP. If the movie-industry wants to take
action against this user, it has to take this to the police, and
a judge will sign a letter to the ISP, telling the ISP to disclose
the identity of the user. Without a juridical order, the ISP _may not_
disclose customer-data. And certainly not to a US-company which does
not adhere to the rigid privacy-protection-laws we have here.

Cheers
Seegras
-- 
Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve 
neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Maillist-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/swinog%40swinog.ch/